pet_adoptablesfandomcom-20200215-history
User talk:King kurokishi
Heyo, just a reminder that I made an adoption request for the wiki. Once/If it goes through I'll give you higher editing rights so you can help to a higher degree. Thanks for all the hard work so far, by the way! ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 17:40, November 3, 2018 (UTC) Sorry about that! I forget to write the "reasons why" part in when I edit. But I did that change because there are a few categories where we do need a new one (dogs->canines, for example), as well as a few classification issues (crustaceans under molluscs instead of arthropods). "Cats" doesn't need a new category because all of Felidae can be called a "cat." Same with Bears for the most part since there aren't any of the extinct "dog-bears" on-site from my knowledge, and even then we could comfortably call them bears. Dogs need to be put into canines because foxes, maned wolves, etc. don't really fit under the "dog" name, but they can be under canines. I kept Elephants in as a separate category because they're in a really gross taxonomic group (think aardvarks, manatees, atc.) and I'm not sure how to lump them (we could use Pachyderms for rhinos/hippos/etc. but that's not really a real classification anymore). I also lumped categories like rabbits and horses into their respective categories (Lagomorphs and Ungulates, respectively) "Arthropods" is one of the bigger changes since I needed an entirely new section on the navigation template, but in the end, my changes were meant to save time and be easy to understand for browsers. (Ursines are obviously bears, but we can keep it simple for the sake of people who don't know much about taxonomy) If anything I said was confusing, just ask. I typed this out in a hurry since I'm supposed to be getting ready for my morning classes lol. Also, my inner bio major is freaking out at this categorization because I want it to be perfect while also being understandable to people who don't know a lick of animal taxonomy lol. ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 13:50, November 7, 2018 (UTC) Sounds good! Although we might not want to remove the middleman completely since that'll create almost too many initial categories, I'd feel. "Canines" would work if we wanted to just get rid of the "Dogs" and "foxes" category, too, but some people might like the extra specification (i.e. only looking for foxes, but not dogs). It'll be better to have middlemen than an overwhelming number of categories to initially search through. Don't change the categories like Lagomorphs/Gastropods/Cephalopods because those have more than just their namesakes in them (lagomorphs has rabbits/pikas/etc.; gastropods has snails/slugs, etc.). Hybrid can stay under "Type." That sounds fine. Also, I'm fine with the template change! I feel like we should keep drastic name changes to a minimum soon because if we re-format all 1000+ pages just to have to fix them again, it'll cause a lot of work and we'll end up going backward progress-wise. ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 00:19, November 8, 2018 (UTC) What I'm saying is, it's easier to find a specific thing with narrower categories. Say you're looking for a specific pet but you only know it's a fox. On PA there are a lot of pets that don't have what they are in the name (Ribbon Lover, for example). If you're looking through a list of 100+ different pets just labeled under one category, it's harder to find than if it's filed away under a more specific subcategory with fewer pages to sift through. (i.e Mammals->Canines->Foxes instead of Mammals->Canines). From my experience, more categories is better than less when the content you're categorizing is very large. Of the 1000+ pages on this wiki, at least 90% are probably Pet pages. On the issue of the category names being too hard, I honestly am not sure what to do about that. We could do something like "Slugs and Snails" instead of "Gastropods". "Octopuses, Squids & Cuttlefish" and "Rabbits, Hares & Pikas" would cover "Cephalopods" and "Lagomorphs," respectively. Also, speaking of categories, I like what you did with the little pictures next to the page name. The one issue I see now is categories aren't being listed at the top anymore. Any case you could figure out how to do that? ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 13:06, November 8, 2018 (UTC) Ignore the question about the category images; I figured it out lol. ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 19:35, November 8, 2018 (UTC) Not necessarily. We could split cats into Big/Little cats (Pantherinae & Felinae, respectively) but Fishes can stay simplified as Freshwater/Marine. If we wanted to have a Sharks & Rays category, that would make sense, but with the small number of fishes onsite I don't think it's an issue at the moment. Hmm. Ungulates is a tricky one... Maybe just replace it with "Hoofstock" since that is more self-explanatory than "Ungulates" lol. It means a similar thing, too. Oh! Well then thanks Wikia guys lol. I do agree on the combining of the formats. It seems like the better of the two options, especially since the current layout already lets us use tiny pictures (yay!) which fits very well with the 100x100px images PA uses with a lot of pets. Hopefully, they update it to fix the category display issue because I kinda like the look. I gave you admin rights. Cheers! ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 00:26, November 11, 2018 (UTC) Thank you! I'll be sure to ask if I have any questions :) Yingy (talk) 18:45, December 4, 2018 (UTC)yingy Got it! Figuring out what the animal is and what category it belongs in has probably been the most challenging part of this hahah :') I also just saw that all the categories are linked at the bottom so I'll try to go off of those too. Thanks! Yingy (talk) 20:40, December 12, 2018 (UTC) 80px is REALLY small on my monitor, and I can only imagine it's tiny on other monitors. For the sake of my sight and others, I felt 100px for all pages (that it's compatible with) is better for viewers' (and my) eyes. It's also the native size for most of PA's images. The 80px looks nice on the 4-stage pages because it's the only way they'll fit without the infobox knocking them down. It also looks very awkward on pages with 1-Alt 1-Stage pets. I can agree on the category changes, but I'd rather not be the one to go through and change them all because of how many there are, and how many pages still need to move over to the new format. Feel free to rearrange them, but I have other things on my Wiki checklist to do (and college papers to write and exams to study for). That looks a lot better (and for sure easier on the eyes). Are you making that the standard for all pages, or just 4-alt pages? I guess make them all 92px, but I still think it may look a little off on pages with pets with only 1 alt & 1 stage. I'll probably get used to it eventually. That doesn't look too bad, actually. I can live with this lol. Thanks for working with me on a compromise, because at least now I won't have to edit my Search & Replace tool every time, heh. ᴀ ʟɪᴛᴛʟᴇ ᴏʙsᴇssᴇᴅ (talk) 00:36, December 17, 2018 (UTC)